Over the last several years, many of the federal rules have undergone a process known as restyling, designed to make them simpler, more understandable and easier to read and use. With the exception of the rules in Part 8, which were recently revised, the Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure have not been restyled, partially in deference to their close linkage to provisions of the Bankruptcy Code.

The Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules is now considering whether to recommend that the Bankruptcy Rules undergo the restyling process and is soliciting input from the public. With the assistance of the Federal Judicial Center, the Advisory Committee’s Restyling Subcommittee has created a short survey seeking opinions and comments on the benefits and drawbacks of restyling.

If you or your organization would like to provide feedback, please complete the survey (link is external) by June 15, 2018. We encourage you to contribute your views.

The survey results will be reviewed by the Restyling Subcommittee and given careful consideration as it decides what recommendation to make to the Advisory Committee.

No doubt you have seen posts here and elsewhere that discuss whether computer competency is now required due diligence for attorneys. The Oklahoma Supreme Court bench-slammed an older attorney for his lack of computer literacy. But, before you make up your mind, read the dissent. -CCE

No doubt many of you have already have bookmarked this site. K&L Gates compiled this comprehensive list of local rules, forms and guidelines for U.S. District Courts and U.S. Bankruptcy Courts. At the bottom of their post, you will find a link that will take you directly to the U.S. Court’s website of all federal court rules. Thank you, K&L Gates. -CCE

Local Rules, Forms and Guidelines of United States District Courts Addressing E-Discovery Issues

Many United States District Courts now require compliance with special local rules, forms, or guidelines addressing the discovery of electronically stored information. Below is a collection of those local rules, forms and guidelines, with links to the relevant materials. Please note also that many individual judges and magistrate judges have created their own forms or have crafted their own preferred protocols for e-discovery. These are generally available on the website of the individual judge or magistrate judge and care should be taken to ensure you are aware of any such forms or guidelines in any court you may appear in.

An Illinois judge on Friday ruled [opinion, PDF] a law intended to fix the pension crisis in the state violates the Illinois constitution. Sangamon Country Circuit [official website] Judge John Belz ruled in favor of state employees and retirees who sued to block the law. Last December, state lawmakers passed [JURIST report] the bill [text, PDF], which amended the state’s pension plan in an effort to cut spending and lower the state’s debt. The law would raise the retirement age and lower annual increases in pensions to retired employees, which would be based on the number of years worked. Public employee unions challenged the measure under the Pension Protection Clause of the Illinois Constitution [materials], arguing that the constitution prohibits reducing benefits or compensation. In response, the state argued that pensions can be modified in times of fiscal emergency. ‘The state of Illinois made a constitutionally protected promise to its employees concerning their pension benefits,’ wrote Judge Belz. ‘Under established and uncontroverted Illinois law, the state of Illinois cannot break this promise. Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan [official website] announced [statement] that they “plan to immediately appeal the decision to the Illinois Supreme Court.’

Pension rights have been a controversial issue recently. In December, a judge for the US Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Michigan [official website] ruled [JURIST report] that the city of Detroit is eligible for bankruptcy [JURIST op-ed]. The insolvent city’s debt [JURIST op-ed] includes 3.5 billion dollars in pension funds. The bankruptcy was allowed to go forward despite a Michigan state court ruling [JURIST report] last year which held that the city’s filing for bankruptcy violated the Michigan Constitution. The bankruptcy court held that the pension funds could not be treated any differently than other unsecured debt. In March 2013 the US District Court for the Southern District of New York [official website] denied [JURIST report] a motion to dismiss a lawsuit brought by a pension plan holder against JPMorgan (JPM) [corporate website; JURIST news archive]. The court found that sufficient allegations were raised to support a claim for breaches of both the duty of care and the duty of loyalty.

‘Seizure and confiscation of proceeds of crime, and funds intended to finance terrorism, are key objectives of the global initiative to combat money laundering and terrorism financing. The timely identification and immobilization of such funds are critical to permit the action necessary to prevent the flight of illicit assets beyond the reach of national law enforcement and prosecutorial authorities.’

Suspending Suspicious Transactions was published during July 2013 by the World Bank. It examines the role Financial Intelligence Units, (‘FIUs’), can have in freezing assets and/or postponing financial transactions at banks.

Federal judges and the journalists who cover them share much common ground. One clear area of mutual interest is accurate and informed coverage of federal courts. A Journalist’s Guide to the Federal Courts is intended to assist reporters assigned to court coverage. It is the media who inform and educate the public about the courts, spark discussion and debate about their work, instill public trust and confidence in the institution and its function, and help protect judicial independence. These are worthwhile and important pursuits.

There are justifiable and distinct differences between the three branches of government and the access they grant the news media. Most of the work of federal courts is performed in open court and decisions, and in most cases court filings are available on the Internet. This primer is aimed at helping reporters who cover federal appellate, district, and bankruptcy courts – the cases, the people, and the process.

Jeff reviews a free app created by Matthew Zorn called “DkT.” In this post, Jeff leads you through the various steps to use this app. Because this is the first version, no doubt Matthew will tweak it as time goes by. Regardless of its minor flaws, if you practice in federal court, this is an incredibly useful tool for your iPad or iPhone. -CCE

If you ever practice in federal court, then using PACER is a part of your job. PACER websites typically let you select a mobile option so that you can access PACER on an iPad or an iPhone, but the experience isn’t ideal. You cannot save your username or password, it is difficult to manually enter case numbers, and every time you access a docket sheet or a document you have to pay to do so. Matthew Zorn, an attorney at a large New York law firm, decided to do something about that, so he spent nine months writing a useful and beautifully designed app that he calls DkT. The DkT app is free and can access PACER for federal appellate, district and bankruptcy courts.

Section 341 of the United States Bankruptcy Code requires that the United States Trustee shall hold a meeting of the creditors within a reasonable time (usually within 20 and 40 days) after a Bankruptcy Petition is filed. It doesn’t restrict that to cases with assets or ongoing business activities or anything else. It requires a meeting of creditors (generally referred to as the first meeting, because there can be more in complicated cases) in all cases filed.

It is called the First Meeting of Creditors (or 341 hearing), which confuses many of my clients who then seem to think that their creditors will actually show up. In most consumer cases it is really a meeting between the Trustee assigned to the case, the debtor and debtor’s counsel. I doubt anyone actually knows why the same provision for the same meeting is included in the Code for all chapters. In reality…